Ignore the billboard. Hire the right coach for the right reasons.

[Roy H.]

Jeez Louise.

Some of y'all need to consider that hiring a woman might actually HELP.

Fighting adversity unites people. It can be one of the more uplifting things ever. Give us some purpose.

Does that sound like something we need? A sense of purpose?

Does to me.

I think that's a better reason to hire someone than saying "don't hire because of gender" is a reason NOT to hire.

I think that’s a lousy reason to hire somebody, honestly.  Galvanizing your team through self-created adversity?  If our players don’t have a sense of purpose, we need new players.

That said, it would be silly to ignore a potentially good coach due to their sex.  Hammon is a legit candidate.  Lawson, on the other hand, would be a gimmick.

[nickagneta]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

[Roy H.]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

What makes Lawson very highly qualified?

One year as a low level assistant?  Or three games as Duke’s head coach?

Those renting the billboard care about the presence of a vagina more so than qualifications.  Hammon is extremely qualified.  Lawson is an agenda-driven nonsense candidate.

[gift]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

Why does Lawson belong on the billboard next to Hammon? You, like the billboard, seem to be lumping them together for some reason.

[nickagneta]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

What makes Lawson very highly qualified?

One year as a low level assistant?  Or three games as Duke’s head coach?

Those renting the billboard care about the presence of a vagina more so than qualifications.  Hammon is extremely qualified.  Lawson is an agenda-driven nonsense candidate.

What makes her highly qualified is her experience but also a whole lot of stuff that are in the answers to the questions I asked.

This franchise already hired her as a coach. They know all the answers to my questions. By giving her an interview, it shows me Stevens feels her very highly qualified to do the job, even if some bloggers on an internet site, that have to resort crude mentions about her body parts to make a point, that know nothing about her total capabilities, don't see it that way.

[PhoSita]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

What makes Lawson very highly qualified?

One year as a low level assistant?  Or three games as Duke’s head coach?

Those renting the billboard care about the presence of a vagina more so than qualifications.  Hammon is extremely qualified.  Lawson is an agenda-driven nonsense candidate.

What makes her highly qualified is her experience but also a whole lot of stuff that are in the answers to the questions I asked.

This franchise already hired her as a coach. They know all the answers to my questions. By giving her an interview, it shows me Stevens feels her very highly qualified to do the job, even if some bloggers on an internet site, that have to resort crude mentions about her body parts to make a point, that know nothing about her total capabilities, don't see it that way.

The players also really like her and that's like 50% (at least) of the HC job these days.

[CptZoogs]

Maybe this warrants a different thread, but there have been a lot of differing opinions on what factors are important for a coach to be successful.  There are a lot of factors that aren't exactly measuarble, but many of the factors mentioned here are.  It's conceivable we could conduct a retrospective study and do some exploratory analysis.  We wouldn't be able to draw any causal conclusions, but there may be some evidence of patterns.  The only issue is the data mining would be time consuming.  If others were interested, we could split up the work and maybe focus on a subset of teams individually.  Record the coach tenures along with a collection of covariates that were trackable and perhaps use win% as a response.  Would anyone be interested?

[Roy H.]

By the way, why are people talking about being Marcus Smart’s shooting coach for the 2020 season like it’s an accomplishment?

He declined (in some cases drastically) from the year before in FG%, 2PT%, 3PT% and eFG%. 

So, when we talk about “highly qualified”, shouldn’t we note that her one year of NBA experience was a fairly large failure?

FG%: 42.2% -> 37.5%
2PT%: 51.1% -> 41.5%
3PT%: 36.4% -> 34.7%
eFG%: .533 -> .476

Even worse, his FG%, 2PT% and eFG% went back up after Lawson left.

[PhoSita]

If she impressed Stevens and built strong relationships with the players such that the team is considering her for HC despite her lack of other credentials I would say that speaks pretty well of the job she did while she was an assistant.

[Roy H.]

By giving her an interview, it shows me Stevens feels her very highly qualified to do the job, even if some bloggers on an internet site, that have to resort crude mentions about her body parts to make a point, that know nothing about her total capabilities, don't see it that way

What interview?

Also, the word “vagina” isn’t crude.  In my opinion, finding it to be so probably more misogynistic than anything suggested by the OP.

If she impressed Stevens and built strong relationships with the players such that the team is considering her for HC despite her lack of other credentials I would say that speaks pretty well of the job she did while she was an assistant.

Has it been reported that Stevens is considering her?  Danny already ruled her out, and her name wasn’t among those reported by Woj or any other respectable source.

[Kiorrik]

Jeez Louise.

Some of y'all need to consider that hiring a woman might actually HELP.

Fighting adversity unites people. It can be one of the more uplifting things ever. Give us some purpose.

Does that sound like something we need? A sense of purpose?

Does to me.

I think that's a better reason to hire someone than saying "don't hire because of gender" is a reason NOT to hire.

I think that’s a lousy reason to hire somebody, honestly.  Galvanizing your team through self-created adversity?  If our players don’t have a sense of purpose, we need new players.

That said, it would be silly to ignore a potentially good coach due to their sex.  Hammon is a legit candidate.  Lawson, on the other hand, would be a gimmick.

My point isn't it's a good reason to hire someone. My point it's a less lousy reason than not hiring someone for their sex

My vote was Hammon cuz she's working under Pop. I can't imagine a better teacher. But it's also why I think we won't get her. Probably spur4life.

[PhoSita]

Has it been reported that Stevens is considering her?  Danny already ruled her out, and her name wasn’t among those reported by Woj or any other respectable source.

I'm referring to a hypothetical scenario where Stevens offers her an interview or actually offers her the job.

From what some others had written in the thread I was under the impression that they had already asked to interview her.


As for the billboard, I don't think it's unreasonable for people to see her as a legitimate option given that she was already an assistant coach with the team and was reportedly very well liked by the coaching staff and by the players.

I would be concerned about her lack of experience as a coach in the NBA.  However, it does seem like building relationships with the players is a major part of the job in today's NBA, and what I've heard about Lawson makes it seem like that's a strength of hers.


The reality here is that there are a number of seemingly qualified candidates for the job.  We as fans don't have enough information to really parse between the different options, especially since so much of this probably comes down to personality and charisma, which it's impossible to really judge from afar.  Given a slate of plausible candidates and without enough information to be especially confident about which ones are more or less impressive than the others, I think it's totally legitimate and fair for people to feel more excited about one or more candidates than the others based on characteristics like gender or race.

Is gender likely to be a deciding factor for Brad in choosing who to hire?  I doubt it.  Is race? That ones trickier.  I suspect that some of the prominent players on the team may have strong feelings about wanting a black head coach.  If that's the case, then it's a legitimate factor to consider.  Keeping the key players on the team happy is perhaps the most important part of the HC job in the modern NBA.

[Roy H.]

From what some others had written in the thread I was under the impression that they had already asked to interview her.

Nope. 

And I think that Danny made it pretty clear that she wasn’t qualified:

I think it would probably be pretty unrealistic that she would be able to leave Duke at this time. She has no head coaching experience. But Kara was great in her role with Boston. She had great connection with a lot of the players.”

“This is not gonna be my decision, but coaching in the NBA is hard,” Ainge said. “It’s really hard. It’s a lot of really hard decisions you have to make on a daily basis. I don’t think it’s a coincidence if you look around the league right now just at the top Coach of the Year candidates. …You have a lot of coaches that have been fired. Some two or three times. And I think that that experience is invaluable. Coaches get better as they have more experience. So, I think experience does matter. Is it everything? No, but it does matter — no doubt about it.”

[PhoSita]

From what I've read it sounds like Lawson is probably unlikely to leave Duke so soon, but I guess you never know.

[liam]

Very surprising how threatened some seem to be by a billboard...